April 3, 2011

Basically, [he] had nobody in his church anyway and this is an effort to get some publicity for him. He got it. But in the process ten to twenty people have been killed. You-- you-- you-- religious extremism in any form is wrong. And certainly all these deaths is wrong. I’m very, very disappointed that this man who we had some dealings with in January, December, who indicated he wouldn’t do anything. And suddenly, I guess, the publicity had fallen down a little bit so he decided to do this. It’s-- it’s really too bad. And, I think people should understand the consequences of what they do un-- under the guise of reli-- religion.

What guise? Criticizing a rival religion's scripture is religion. What would it be a guise for? You can't just say "publicity." Most public speakers are trying to get attention. Reid himself is trying to get attention by going on "Face the Nation."

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, you introduced a resolution to condemn this by the Congress... or where do you go from here?

SENATOR HARRY REID: We’ll-- we’ll take a look at this, of course. John Kerry, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, has been on top of this. He’s made many trips to Afghanistan. And I think we’ll take a look at this as to whether we need hearings or not, I don’t know.

And that's the end of the discussion. Zero attention is paid to freedom of speech or religious freedom. Neither Schieffer nor Reid gives a damn (or dares to say he gives a damn). Pathetic.

ADDED: Later in the show, Lindsey Graham opines on the same issue:

You know I wish we could find some way to-- to-- to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea but we’re in a war. During World War II, you had limits on what you could say if it would inspire the enemy. So burning a Koran is a terrible thing. But it doesn’t justify killing someone. Burning a bible would be a terrible thing but it doesn’t justify murder. But having said that, any time we can push back here in America against actions like this that put our troops at risk we ought to do it. So I look forward to working with Senator Kerry and Reid and others to condemn this, condemn violence all over the world based in the name of religion.

"[T]o condemn this"... this what? "[C]ondemn violence all over the world based in the name of religion." I can't tell whether he's condemning the Koran-burning or the murders purported inspired by Koran-burning. Is Koran-burning "violence"? Graham is incomprehensibly mealy-mouthed. "Free speech is a great idea... any time we can push back...we ought to do it"? What WWII precedents does he mean to invoke, and can he get his position — assuming he can state it clearly — anywhere close to American constitutional law?

The last time around on this issue, I supported the pastor's right but still thought it was a dumb thing to do. Most of all I was amazed that the luminaries of the American government took time out of their busy schedules to condemn him.

Now I'm beginning to think that that condemnatory approach is a kind of permissive acceptance of Sharia. It makes plausible a scenario like that Robert Ferrigno's novel Prayers for the Assassin, in which a majority of Americans convert to Islam following a series of terrorist attacks. This creeping acceptance of Islamic anti-blasphemy laws is softening up a lot of people for some kind of apocalyptic event. Scary--in more ways than one.

Whose sensibilities are more eagerly policed by our political/media/academic elite: those of Muslims in the Middle East ("we swear, America is not against you! Hell, we'd repress this Jones if only our antiquated Constitution let us, and we're gonna fix that real soon!!") or those of Americans ("don't fool yourselves into thinking that damned antiquated Constitution is going to protect you from doing these hateful bigoted things to our peace-loving Muslim friends, because we're going to circumvent that nonsense real soon!!")?

The affect of the coverage is that it's a 100% certainty that Jones' asinine public display caused the slaughter. These people time their attacks, which they are always planning, for when it's easiest to get away with them and they can make the most impact. If they'd wanted to make a similar testament to their strength and barbarism a month ago they would've used the Danish cartoons as a justification. They're willing to blow you out of the sky with a suicide bomb, don't think they won't spin you.

I'm not making apologies for Terry Jones, but I suspect he was unprepared for the Taliban's response. As for freedom of speech, wouldn't Koran-burning fall under what Oliver Wendell Holmes said about shouting "fire" in a crowded theater?

I think Terry Jones had the right to do what he did. However, it was stupid..and I do think it is a publicity stunt of sorts..even Ed Morrisey over at Hot Air said that and he has defended the Pastor's actions.

I also don't think that the state has any right to interfere with the first amendment rights of Americans..and I am sure that if they tried they would lose. The Supreme Court would side with Jones, just like it sided with Phelps.

So, yes, I think Terry Jones is a sorry excuse, I really do...but then the world is full of sorry excuses just like him. It does not mean you can take away his rights. Idiot that he is.

These people are not people according to Reid.They have no thought or impulse control, they are nothing more than animals. That Jones is scum does not negate the fact the killers are animals. Dangerous animals are put down.

I wonder where these 7th century geniuses got the information. Surely they are not checking the news of Jones' church every week. Newsweak helped a bit by printing a fake story of flushing Korans down composting toilets that don't have water in them. Now we have the same phenomenon that happened with regard to the Mohammad cartoons. It was months later when some radical mullahs took the information to Pakistan and started preaching about it. That was an obvious effort to stir things up and the Jones story is almost certainly just a pretext.

Burn, baby, burn. Hardly matters, they'll cut your head off for just about any old reason. How many writers/artists live in hiding due to this fatwa or that? How many women stoned or murdered in accord with the Koran? Death toll attributed to the Muhammad drawings? How many in the EU afraid to speak-up because of hate-speech laws. And while I'm at it, a pox on pols (including Gen Petraeus) for calling for self-censorship.

Even if it were wise, in the abstract, for government to bring about "resolutions" or "hearings" to the effect of condemning such burnings, it would be ridiculous to do so in the actual circumstances; in light of the murders. It would reinforce such behavior. Rampage when offended, and you'll get what you want (condemnations, at best, and curtailing, at worst, of speech).

Things would be better if anyone who condemned the speech would only do so simultaneously with condemning the murder with more force (proportional to the moral difference between destroying a book and a person); or perhaps by saying that one will condemn such speech (but not the right to give it) only if it isn't followed by such immoral reactions.

FLS kept digging: "The photo of the crucifix allegedly submerged in urine signifies how the modern world has pissed on Christ and what he stands for."

You must frequently buy into bullshit. What's weird is the following, which is not bullshit, that you don't buy into: The burning of the Koran on American soil symbolizes the freedom of speech enshrined in our constitution and the killing of innocent civilians on the other side of the world in response reflect the barbaric, backward, and animalistic culture of the region in which it happened.

During World War II, we had limits on what you could do if it inspired the enemy,” Graham said, adding certain speech can “put our troops at risk.”

Bullshit. Graham has this totally ass-backwards.

During WW2, certain speech to “inspire” the enemy was limited, but that was speech in support of the enemy, as in “providing aid and comfort.” The American German Bund was effectively shut down by the HUAC during the war, because of their overtly Nazi support. And that is completely reasonable in wartime. In the meantime, the government was cranking out some of the most virulent and effective propaganda ever scene in order to whip up support for our side and turn the other side into the personification of the Hordes of Hell.

I guaran-damn-tee that if some preacher had burned a mound copies of Mein Kampf and had the event filmed and distributed, he’d have been hailed as a patriot of the highest caliber.

I’m sure it would have pissed off a lot of Nazis, driving them to greater efforts to kill Americans. But that consideration would not have entered into the minds of that generation, because the Nazis were already killing lots of Americans in the first place! What mattered was the fact that this enemy presented an existential threat, and was to be treated accordingly.

Contrast that with how we treat CAIR, which is this effectively this generation’s answer to the German American Bund.

I despise superstitious clowns like Terry Jones, as much as I despise Illinois Nazis, but like those Nazis, he has every right to exercise his 1st Amendment rights. He is not morally culpable for the behavior of Islamonazi savages on the other side of the world. They’re already behaving like this on a very regular basis. They’re already killing Americans, so the professional outrage as a result of Jones burning a Koran is rather thin gruel.

The people of South Carolina need to get their collective heads out of their asses and hand Graham his on a platter. His support of limiting our speech to appease the Religion of the Perpetually Offended is but one of many reasons to primary his ass out of existence.

"Which GMay thinks is a universal value because he cannot imagine that another earthling could have competing or superseding values."

He's not the only one...

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,[72] that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Muslim killing for anti-Christian purposes will go on under many disguises. Try shipping Muslims Bibles and they will first slowly cut the head off the the UPS man and then burn all of the bibles. The Dems are sucking up to the Muslims big time , especially Obama's Jewish Specialist (I.e.,Samantha Power). The 1848 like Arab Spring of rebellions is a signal that the world's attention will be turning to Israel and a UN mandated State that includes Jewish surrender of Jerusalem, and Obama never lets a crisis go to waste.

The lesson from this incident isn't that shitkicker pastors from the redneckiest of Florida are responsible for the ills of the world. As much as the anti-Judeo-Christian Left would like you to believe that some snake handler has everything to do with what's wrong in the Muslim world, they are wrong.

Sure, it's a shame that this guy did what he did and I condemn him. But it's the Koran burned in Florida today and the cartoons yesterday and the Koran-in-the-Gitmo-toilet story the day before that. This is a symptom of a larger problem. And it's not going to go away if we put Terry Jones in a straight-jacket.

I know I don't want to think this way but I've lost a lot of faith in the 1.2B who pray to Muhammed. I fear there's no way to find reason in their lives built on a religion.

fls said.......The photo of the crucifix allegedly submerged in urine signifies how the modern world has pissed on Christ and what he stands for."

That wasn't the point. The point is if that doesn't merit a Congressional hearing then burning a Muslim symbol does not merit either. Unless you are an apologist and a toady for the religion of peace. As so many people like Harry Reid and Barry O.

Which I understand is ok for the President since it is his religion he has a right to be pissed. Just sayn'

I don't have much sympathy for Jones. I know he did not kill anyone, but he was told time and again that something like this could happen and he apparently did not care. When people began to die, he said "this just proves my point."

He has the right to do this, but it just makes things more difficult for the troops and the UN people who have been sent to Afghanistan. They are the ones I feel sorry for. I also feel sorry for the Afghans who had nothing to do with this insanity but are being blamed for it anyway.

And what about the Muslims who had nothing to do with the violence? I think it is true that Jones is not responsible for the actions of others...but are all Muslims responsible for the actions of all other Muslims? Shouldn't we just blame the people who did the deed?

It just seems a tad inconsistent.

I am not a fan of Islam for a lot of different reasons. But I also don't think it is fair to blame millions of people for the actions of a mob.

Harry Reid is an asswipe of the first order, and the Senate majority "leader". My God, how pathetic. Cynical, stupid and in power. What is wrong with us that we allow such scum to slither through the halls of Congress?

The silly bastard threatens hearings to investigate a silly ignorant bastard who burnt the holy book of other silly ignorant bastards who then murder in cold blood.

Contemptible Congress is in contempt of Congress and the American people.

So, Althouse is upset that these folks didn't speak up in order to support this FL guy's religious freedom.

And, Althouse didn't speak up in order to support the construction of the ground zero mosque.

Althouse advocates for anti-Islam religious freedom, but she expresses opposition to pro-Islam religious freedom. Why are Schieffer and Reid pathetic when they choose to disapprove of some religious zealot, because they believe that the zealot's actions will antagonize folks ? This is precisely why Althouse opposed the ground zero mosque. Is Althouse pathetic?

If criticizing someone's religion is freedom of religion, then criticizing that criticizer is also a protected freedom. Why does Althouse--who regularly claims to support tough political language--get to choose when the freedom back and forth ends?

"I don't have much sympathy for Jones. I know he did not kill anyone, but he was told time and again that something like this could happen and he apparently did not care. When people began to die, he said "this just proves my point."

Here is what I see, and consider important, that other people seem to either not see or gloss over.

Terry Jones is a man. Homo sapiens sapiens, even if not particularly wise. The murdering protestors in Afghanistan are men too. Same species. They have brains, and feelings, and passions, and families like the rest of us. None of them are inanimate objects.

To follow Althouse's post, Harry Reid is treating the Afghan protestors as inanimate objects. Somebody acts in Florida, they react in Afghanistan. Action followed by reaction, with nothing in between. I object to that. Terry Jones made his choice--and they made theirs. His choice was to burn a Koran and theirs was to murder people.

Oh, and another thing, that last phrase that so offended you? The cold truth is that the riots and murders, to a large extent, do prove his point.

Well I am glad to see that pgAndJ is against building the Ground Zero mosques since he is against offending the religious sensitivities of everyone. Or is it only the sensitivities of murderous barbarians?

And what about the Muslims who had nothing to do with the violence? I think it is true that Jones is not responsible for the actions of others...but are all Muslims responsible for the actions of all other Muslims? Shouldn't we just blame the people who did the deed?

I don't blame the people who didn't do the killing, but you need a society willing to shun those who rampage against copts, Korans in toilets, Koran burnings, etc.

Instead of our government leaders telling the Afghans to shun this behavior, I hear them apologizing for our (one man's!) behavior.

Groups who love to murder don't just choose to go away- they have to be told by their fellow citizens that their actions are not acceptable.

I did not see many people in Wisconsin shunning the idiots who showed up to demonstrate against Walker and this is the United States.

The Taliban kill people. In fact thousands of Afghans have lost their lives standing up to these people. Young women have risked death just to go to school. So it easy for us to say what they should and should not do...after all, we don't have to live there..and most of us will never have to serve there either. But the people who do have to confront these dangerous people every day. And while Terry Jones is not responsible for murders he did not commit, he sure as hell did not show any real concern for what would happen when and if the Taliban decided to use this as another pretext to kill more people.

Why did his remark "that just proves my point" offend me? Because it just showed that he was aware of the possibility that innocent people could die and thought it was more important that he make his point than it was if there was a big bloody mess.

And I am not defending anything Reid says, I can't stand the guy.

But the point is too that Jones did not show us anything we did not already know. It was useless and stupid.

How about this. Let's not reward bad behavior. Either burning a Koran by giving this scumbag publicity or letting muderous Jew haters build a monument to the religion of peace on the exact spot that one of their weapons of mass destruction dropped debris.

I did not see many people in Wisconsin shunning the idiots who showed up to demonstrate against Walker and this is the United States.

You are comparing anti-Walker protesters to murderous rampagers? Why?

So it easy for us to say what they should and should not do...after all, we don't have to live there..and most of us will never have to serve there either. But the people who do have to confront these dangerous people every day.

I'm saying I want people in our Government to say it is not ok to murder people because a man half a world a way mishandled your Holy book.

That we are not there protecting the right to murder for religious offense. We are not there so we, in our own country, have to be so perfect that *not one citizen* offends the wrong person. That is a standard we can't live up to and never have been asked to try.If things are so risky for us that *that* is the standard, we need to leave.

First, I don't think burning the flag or anybody's holy book constitutes free speech; that's something invented by the hard-Left SCOTUS of the 60s and the Black Robes don't diss each other.

That said, Jones is lying through his teeth when he says he bears no blame for the murders that have happened in the wake of this. We've seen too many examples to know the Moslems go berserk if anyone defiles their religion (of course, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and Hindus are supposed to sit there and like it when the Moslems do it to them).

More to the point, Dingy Harry is playing to his base. As our own little trolls remind us all the time, the Left believes in tolerance and understanding, except when it comes to Christianity and Judaism. And he knows any "legislation" enacted will be struck down in the appellate courts.

You don't know jack about Sen. Reid's career or voting record, edutcher--merely quoting the Teabugger/GOP party line. The oil boys--aka puppetmasters of the GOP--hate Reid, as does the finance mafia. Ergo, the GOP/TP puppets follow orders.

fls: Which GMay thinks is a universal value because he cannot imagine that another earthling could have competing or superseding values.

Ffs, fls, you're the only one here doesn't understand "that another earthling could have competing or superseding values", since you can't grasp that Americans place their own value of freedom of speech above Muslim values about respect for their holy book.

At any rate, you've long since established that you believe the government should be in the business of imposing Muslim blasphemy laws on non-Muslims, so there's no need to muck up any straightforward exposition of this belief of yours with further demonstrations of your incapacity to avoid fallacious inferences.

(Here, I'll make an effort to help, even though everybody here already knows that making sense is a "competing and superseding value" to your own foundational value of freedom from the dead hand of Western logic: That an American wants our own value of free speech to prevail in our own country tells you nothing about about his beliefs about "universal values", or about whether he recognizes and understands somebody else's values.)

So if you are a member of a religion you get a free pass in destroying the religious symbols of that faith? What does his religion have to do with it? That makes no sense whatsoever. Seriously dude you need to rethink this. You reflexive desire to defend these muderous barbarians is getting the best of you.

If religious symbols are off limits and the destruction of same calls for Congressional Hearings then it doesn't matter who is doing the destruction.

The point is that Andres Serrano is a Roman Catholic from the cradle criticizing what happened to his religion.

So now in order to deteremine whether an act is protected free speech, we need some expert (a former law student, no doubt) to examine the background, psychology, and motivation of the person committing the act.

That an American wants our own value of free speech to prevail in our own country tells you nothing about about his beliefs about "universal values", or about whether he recognizes and understands somebody else's values.

fls: The point is that Andres Serrano is a Roman Catholic from the cradle criticizing what happened to his religion.

No, that isn't the point. Not peripherally, not tangentially, not at all. It's just some entirely beside-the-point distinction you pulled out of your ass in your perennial futile effort to continue deluding yourself that there's something solid at the core of the stinking gas-ball that is your vacuous world-(non)view.

No Angiestein it's you who doesn't understand the issue, which has nothing to do with the teabugger love of "phree speech", but with insubordination during warfare, more or less. Gen. Petraeus instructed the hick preacher (Jones) to refrain from burning the Koran, for one.

You know these murderous barbarians rail against our culture and the free and unfettered sensuality on display in our media. That is why they repress woman and rip the clits out of their daughters before they can learn about sexuality.

Terry Jones is not morally culpable for the actions of Islamic savages in Afghanistan, because in our land, what he did is not incitement. It is speech, and he is free to practice it. He is not responsible for how other cultures receive the action, because he doesn't exist within their construct. He is merely the locus of their perpetual offense at a given moment in time.

You're too f-ing stupid to blog, Mojo--best to finish the pearl diver shift at what the Tulsa IHOP.

Anyway, we'll see how the phreedom fighter defense holds up. He was ordered by Gen. Petraeus not to burn it, and he's got Sen Reid and others on him as well. Probably hasta la buh bye for preacher trash

[Terry Jones] is not responsible for how other cultures receive the action, because he doesn't exist within their construct.

And how does that console the loved ones of Joakim Dungel, a 33-year-old Swede; Lt. Col. Siri Skare, a 53-year-old female pilot from Norway; and Filaret Motco, a 43-year-old Romanian, who no longer exist within their particular construct, either?

No, I don't think he's a parody in the way you mean it. He is ceratinly a parody of a cogent human being, but as far as his utterances here, they aren't intentional parody of a barking mad ignorant asswipe. He is a barking mad ignorant asswipe.

It's funny when a minister of the Christian religion shows less religious tolerance, and ecumenism, than Minister Farrakhan. Minister Farrakhan merely said that Judaism was "a gutter religion"; as I recall he never burned a Torah.

He was ordered by Gen. Petraeus not to burn it, and he's got Sen Reid and others on him as well. Probably hasta la buh bye for preacher trash

Well, there's one problem there, sport: Jones is most certainly not within Petraeus's chain of command, and is no more subject to the good General's "command" than I am.

See, this is where your parody stumbles. No whacked out liberal would invoke an Army general that they obviously despise - Betrayaeus! - in order to argue that a douche preacher in Florida is forbidden to burn a fuckin' Koran.

And how does that console the loved ones of Joakim Dungel, a 33-year-old Swede; Lt. Col. Siri Skare, a 53-year-old female pilot from Norway; and Filaret Motco, a 43-year-old Romanian, who no longer exist within their particular construct, either?

Not his problem or responsibility.

Better to ask the UN. After all, it was they who provided totally inadequate defenses for their personnel in a brutal war zone full of Islamic savages bent on killing anyone not them for whatever reason seems fashionable at the moment.

Actually I was comparing the people making death threats against Republicans in Wisconsin..and how many people cared other than the people who were the objects of the death threats? Were the unions shunned? No, in fact they came out better in terms of public opinion than the Republicans did.

As far as that is concerned we can not make people in our own inner cities feel safe enough to testify against gang members they see commit crimes every day..and yet we are criticizing Afghans for not being more assertive when it comes to dealing with their own extremists, even when they are the ones who more often than not end up dead.

And those people who worked for the UN were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Why were the murders of innocent people "to be expected"? Because we've seen the same outrage over any number of things, right? It is completely not a surprise when some rumor gets out on the Arab street and people are murdered.Just like a lot of people said Lara Logan being sexually assaulted in Egypt was to be expected.And the female NYT reporter kidnapped in Libya being sexually groped by every man she encountered was "to be expected".

How sad is that?

What are we to do, honestly? Demand perfection from every US citizen. Refuse to send female reporters to Muslim countries.What else do we need to do to stop these crimes of passion?Is the "to be expected" crime in other countries something we want to try to work our lives around?

Oh, puh-leeze! There you go, fls; thinking with your ass, again. It's not a crime of passion to carry out the word of god, which these barbaric savages did with great vigor. It's what they do. The whole thing was planned and premeditated; no passion involved.

You don't know jack about Sen. Reid's career or voting record, edutcher--merely quoting the Teabugger/GOP party line. The oil boys--aka puppetmasters of the GOP--hate Reid, as does the finance mafia. Ergo, the GOP/TP puppets follow orders.

O, but Dingy Harry has given us the benefit of his wit and wisdom on so many occasions, he's come to be the crazy uncle we never had. On cowboy poetry, on how Iraq is lost, on closing down the houses of ill repute in his beloved Silver State, on subjects great and small has he given us a piece of his mind, whether he could spare it or not.

This is the Democrat Party response and Dingy Harry is giving it. As I say, all a show.

What knuckeldragging Christians? I don't think Jones is much of a Christian..he is certainly not any Billy Graham. I am a Christian. I was raised in the Southern Baptist Church. I seem to remember the Golden Rule...do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I would not want someone to place me in unnecessary danger just so he or she could make a point. I would hope that if someone were a Christian they would have more respect for life than that.

Well let's recap for a minute. FLS thinks that symbolic actions from across the world will turn the adherents of the religion of peace into murderous savages. I think he is on to something there. I can sign on to that.

Of course his remedy of abandoning our freedom of speech and religion is not something I could sign on to.

Even the most hateful and stupid speech should not be limited. That’s why the Red Sox can broadcast their games. Just sayn’

Not his responsibility? Legally Jones had the right to burn that Koran, but morally he is not innocent. He is a lousy excuse for a human being.

In the end, he and the Taliban ended up on the same side hoping for the same thing.

Let's start with, "He is a lousy excuse for a human being."

Agreed. He is, but not for the reasons you posit. He's a lousy excuse for a human being because he's a superstitious loon that invokes an nonexistent god to offend the believers of another nonexistent god.

Jones not morally culpable for the actions of barbaric savages on the other side of the planet, who merely grasp at the latest fashionable excuse to inflict murder and mayhem on those other than them.

Hypothetical: Fred Phelps is holding one of his hateful funeral pickets, and Patriot Guards crack and beat some of Fred's folks to death out of righteous rage. Who's responsible.

and yet we are criticizing Afghans for not being more assertive when it comes to dealing with their own extremists, even when they are the ones who more often than not end up dead.

I'm criticizing our government's response. They would rather focus on the bad act of one individual citizen than the murderers. Our government can talk about our ideals to the Afghans. About the right to speak out and the right to be offensive and the right to criticize people who are offensive. Instead, they condemn Jones because he made the Arab street murder people. They are kowtowing to the least common denominator.

I haven't heard you criticize that. Have you?

And yes, in the end, if Afghan society can't sustain a situation in which it is not ok to murder innocent people due to minor religious offenses, we can't start changing our society to accommodate them.What are you willing to give up to make them "safe"?

Just like a lot of people said Lara Logan being sexually assaulted in Egypt was to be expected.And the female NYT reporter kidnapped in Libya being sexually groped by every man she encountered was "to be expected".

Because women = sacrilege? I'm not seeing the equivalence there. Muslims must have sex only with their wives.

I am not going to justify anything those crazy people did over there, but it is just absurd to act as if Jones did not know that could happen. He was told and warned time and again.

Now he has the right to do this, but the idea that he bears no moral responsibility for any of this when he knew damm well what could happen is just ridiculous.

There are millions of people living in that country who had nothing to do with any of this. Thus far there has not been a big response from any other Muslim country. So maybe the entire Muslim world should not be blamed for this murder spree.

The taliban has latched onto this and of course they are murderers, they are using it, they are exploiting and they are wrong to do it...but there would not be anything for them to exploit if Terry Jones had not burned that koran...and he knew exactly what he was doing.

If I tell a jealous man that his wife is cheating on him and he kills her, that is not my crime...but if I knew he is jealous and dangerous and irrational and I tell him anyway knowing full well he might kill or hurt someone..then it becomes more difficult for me to claim some moral high ground.

I just caught the Lindsey Graham stuff. I usually give him a pass, but, damn, he's bringing the stupid. (Not up to FLS's level but close.)

Does he know nothing about the racist anti-German and anti-Japanese propaganda that we churned out during the Second World War? See John Dower's book War Without Mercy to see various savage simian and other bestial depictions of the Japanese. Or similar caricatures of the Hun? Google Images is great for that stuff: Halt the Hun--with a beast in a Pickelhaube.

Yes and they eventually killed him because they were murderous religious fanatics. So you would have Jesus stop his ministry and not engage in this symbolic action because the reaction of those fanatics is what would be expected.

In Pakistan, Asia Bibi is a Christian woman and mother of five who has been given a death sentence for "blasphemy" of the Prophet Muhammed. When will Senators Reid and Graham hold hearings to protest her treatment?

Why don't out politicians and generals have the cojones to stand up and just say - "Our beliefs are different from yours and we allow them since we believe all religions and points of view need to be expressed. That includes the right to offend, since it is only by this thinking that we can have honest dialog and belief. We don't agree with what some say, but we will not suppress them" Reid, Graham and Petraeus betray out fundamental freedoms by insisting we have to be "sensitive" to the Muslim religion. Sounds like a call to Dhimmitude to me. Petraeus deserves special ire since he allowed bibles in Dari to be burned that had been sent to Afghanistan. Would NOT want to offend the natives, after all.

Maybe Reid and Graham can pass a law that requires all copies of the Koran sold in the US to have a tag that reads "Do Not Burn Under Penalty of Causing a Riot" similar to the "Do Not Remove" tags on mattresses. Yeah, that would work!

If the people in Afghanistan are truly just too frightened to speak out against the people who go on these rampages, they will welcome a message that we allow people to offend each other in our country, as long as it is done peacefully. After all, isn't the theory that most Afghans would like to offed these rampaging youths?

That's why I want our government to deliver that message, rather than condemn the one tiny citizen who acted independently two weeks ago.

And if most Afghans don't welcome that message, then we can't create a peaceful culture for them. We should leave.

This sentence should be grounds for impeachment, if not (when spoken by someone in the position of someone who can act on it) imprisonment.

Vomitous. We've been in this "war" for 10 years. I'm not saying it was a bad idea - hell, I even supported Iraq. But the idea of repressing free speech in the name of what is now desultory colonial policing should immediately disqualify a politician from office.

All "holy" books should be protected. No one could burn, deface, or criticize a "holy" book. Then print Obamacare into a book and call it a "holy" book. Presto, no one could criticize Obamcare again without going to jail.

"The point is that Andres Serrano is a Roman Catholic from the cradle criticizing what happened to his religion. Was Pastor Jones raised a Muslim?"

If your point is that one may not criticize or destroy the writings of another because one isn't of the same religion or raised as one, you realize you've precluded yourself from critical commentary on atheism.

Terrye: And while Terry Jones is not responsible for murders he did not commit, he sure as hell did not show any real concern for what would happen when and if the Taliban decided to use this as another pretext to kill more people.

So you admit it's a pretext. Exactly where are you going to draw the line in condemning people who provide a "pretext" for scum to commit the crimes they were going to commit one way or the other? Cartoons? Expressing less than flattering opinions of Islam? Scholarly textual analysis of the Koran?

Because all of the above have merited various and/or combinations of death threats, criminal sanction (in Western countries!), murder...

I am not going to justify anything those crazy people did over there, but it is just absurd to act as if Jones did not know that could happen. He was told and warned time and again.

Enough about those crazy people over there, let's get back to the the important thing, the dumbass preacher. Because while I in no way shape or form justify the behavior of people who grab at any excuse to go on murdering rampages, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD CAN WE GET SERIOUS AND GET BACK TO THE WORLD-HISTORICAL MORAL MONSTER THAT IS THE TWO-BIT NOBODY DUMBASS FLORIDA PREACHER WHO BURNS BOOKS IN PUBLICITY STUNTS?!?

Now he has the right to do this, but the idea that he bears no moral responsibility for any of this when he knew damm well what could happen is just ridiculous.

Yes, it's all about the dumbass preacher.

Terrye? It's not all about the dumbass preacher. It's not about the dumbass preacher at all.

What's "Christian" about burning a Koran? What precedent can we find in the New Testament for it?

Acts 19:19.

No, the books of incantations -- never a core part of Judaism -- were burned by their owners:

One thread that runs through both the Old and New Testaments is the casting out of demons. (Jesus also broke the Sabbath casting out a demon one time.) In the first century there were a bunch of Jews who were particularly good at it, and they had compiled their own books of incantations.

In Acts 19, one such group tries to cast out a demon, who does not recognize their power, only that of Jesus and Paul. They realized that the power to cast out demons had shifted away from them. So their books of incantations being worthless, they burned them and switched to the side of the new power.

sarge here public quaran burning while the u.s. of a has loyal troops in country an folks staffin the emnbassy is frikin retarded an this terry jones needs to be air dropped over afganistan to explain hisself tyo the local muj

it aint a free speech issue its a dumbass ingorant slackjawed inbred hick puttin his personel publicity and financial well bein above the safety of our troops and embassy staff anyone one says otherwise is a slack jawed ignorant hick or sumthin much worse but maybe the althouse regsulars kin tell sarge why being a dumbshit and riskin gthe lives of our troops, our allies troops an various embassy staff is ok for a fatter tith and some teevee time ? yar dun pissed off thesargwe hell the sarge might even use spell check hes so damn mad...fuckin gurkhas killed too sarge loves them gurkhas

"If a man says he is not afraid of dying, he is either lying or is a Gurkha."

What I want more information on is what non-mobbing Muslims think about what happened. What does Islam teach about the appropriate response to the burning of a sacred book? What do other religions do when their sacred books are torched? I know about Christianity, but what about other groups? There are so many good questions to ask, questions for which Terry Jones is not the prime source or target. I’d like those questions looked at.

NEW HAVEN — The vandal or vandals who broke into the Episcopal Church of St. Paul & St. James early today smashed stained glass windows and tore a Bible in half, but did not steal anything of great value.

Police say alarms at St. Paul & St. James Episcopal Church went off at about 3 a.m. When they arrived, police said they found four smashed stained-glass windows. Two of them dated back to the 1800s.

Police also said a wooden cross was destroyed.

“That this happened in the time of Lent, there might be something to that. You’ve got to go through Good Friday to get to Easter,” he said. Good Friday is the day that marks Jesus being put to death on the cross.

Hours after the break-in, the church fed 150 homeless or hungry people with bags of fresh food as part of its Loaves and Fishes food and clothing pantry."

sarge wonders wut wud happin to sarge if sarge burnt a bible in downtown texarkana or gainseville sunday mornin these american folks about as easily riled as yer similarly low functionin poor muslims of afganistan well actully sarge would need to wipe sarges ass wiv this bible to riley rile the american taliban but once riled sarge would be in need of a platoon of gurkhas to git out alive cuz these hick fukers got semi automatic weapons unlike yer average poor afgani see sarge dont see no difference between taliban and terry jones cept the taliban dress more stylish

forgive me if someone else has already thought of this, but we may need to have an "everybody burn a koran day" if this is the level of support for free speech our elected representatives continue to espouse

"Mr. Jones, in a lengthy interview at his church, said he sincerely hoped that his planned Koran-burning would not lead to violence. He dismissed the idea that it could put American troops at greater risk..."

Guess he was wrong about that. Almost as wrong as FLS was about Jones' "demonstration".

"Is the burning of a Koran committed to demonstrate that Muslims would respond to the burning of a Koran by murdering non-Muslims an exercise of free speech?"

Answer: yes.

This isn't hard. You've been schooled over and over and can't grasp basic enlightened cultural principles. Instead you've loaded the thread with false equivalencies and childish fallacies so painfully flawed that your ability to successfully operate a keyboard should be praised.

Follow up question to your stupid trolling:

Are muslims' murderous rages just some animalistic Pavlovian response?

Is there a section of the Koran that directs muslims to murder innocent people for the destruction of the Koran?

Former Law Student wrote:So when some douchenozzle puts a crucifix in urine you want Congressional Hearings right?

The photo of the crucifix allegedly submerged in urine signifies how the modern world has pissed on Christ and what he stands for.

Ah, so what if I burned the koran and said it was symbolic of how the modern world is assaulting all that Islam stands for, that would be ok? So long as there is some symbolism involved or some artistic merit?

How about if I took a dump on a koran on the grounds that the world is taking a dump on all that the Koran stands for? How abut if I throw a koran in a toilet and then take a dump on it to symbolize the Koran's mistreatment in the modern world?How about if I piss on a koran, then shit on the koran, then puke on the koran then set it on fire, then piss on the ashes?

The LDS church (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) held it's general conference yesterday and today. I didn't hear a peep urging us to fire-bomb the theater in NYC where Trey Parker and Matt Stone are producing "The Book of Mormon."

Former law student wrote:I'm so confused: Burning a flag in a dignified manner is a sign of respect to it, according to usflag.org.

Next time a flag is burned, those who oppose flag burning should go on a murderous rampage and kill atheists, liberals and gays (or anybody who happens to be on the street). Next time an abortion is performed, those who oppose abortions should bring machetes into Planned Parenthoods and start hacking peoples heads off. Because clearly burning a flag and commiting abortions are both inciting violence and are hateful acts. So if people murder because of these hateful acts, then it's the fault of those who got them pissed off right? Those chopping off the heads simply can't control themselves.

How about we do a little political theater and burn a bible a koran and the Torah in one go, as kind of atheistic expression of art? Something tells me, that we're not going to have rampaging christians and Jews chopping off heads. Or how about if we PRETEND to burn a koran but instead burn the Bible, (we just put a cover on it that says The Koran). Then people like fls will be confused as to how to respond. At first they'll be like "That's inciting hatred, and those comitting said acts must be stopped", but then when it turns out that it's really a bible they'll be like "That was a valuable expresssion of artistic merit and a prime example of how we must respect freedom of speech principles."Then we could pull a switcheroo and reveal that it was in fact a Koran after all to get them all discombobulated. "how do I respond?? Does not compute, does not compute".And the muslims could be about to rampage and are just about to chop off the infidels heads and hear that it was just a hoax and will be like "Ok, you got us. That was pretty funny, infidel. Now that it's only a Bible obviously us rampaging and chopping off heads seems a bit of an overreaction. Our bad". But then we pull the double switch and they realize that it was in fact a Koran and they'll be like "JIHAD!!!!!!!!! Kill the Infidels!!". Then we could pull the triple switch and say it was neither a copy of the Koran or the Bible but rather a copy of Huck Finn with all the racist words still in there, and have everybody scratch their heads.

fls said "If Jones knew that committing the act of burning a Koran would incite Muslims to kill Westerners, and Jones burned a Koran, then Jones is guilty of solicitation of murder by incitement."

Brilliant! So next time fls says something so stupid, so biased, and so inflammatory that I can no longer contain my rage and I succumb to the overwhelming urge to cut his head off with a carving knife, he will actually be legally responsible for his own murder because he incited me. Especially now that I've warned him-- he has foreknowledge. Any more biased, stupid, inflammatory comments from him and I might just POP!

From what I hear you can't even depict Mohammad in a movie without inciting religious fervor and head choppings (Mohammads image can't be displayed visually as it would promote idolatry or some such nonsense).I for one would LOVE to see a movie based on the Hadiths that show Mohammad's life as a prophet. It would be as violent as The Passion of the Christ, only instead of the violence all being directed towards Jesus, Mohammad and his followers would be chopping off the heads of his enemies and the infernal jews. Why won't hollywood make THAT movie?

Locomotive Breath said...Burn our book and we'll kill you. So much for the Religion of Peace.

============For the record, the various religious leaders of Islam never claimed it was a religion of peace.

That was George Bush's idiocy.

Along with other moronic proclaimations like:

The noble democracy-hungry freedom-loving Muslims are just waiting for Hero Soldiers to liberate them with eternal gratitude,They all also "hungered" to Free women of their Burquas and establish women colleges and professional programs.We owe it to the people there to end a regime that kills its own people. (What bad regime does NOT kill it's own people??)

So you had Bush and his neocon idiots throwing out "religion of peace" and any Muslim pleased at the stupidity of the enemy thinking so, of course piped in "yeh! Regligion of Peace! If you say so!"

I don't know if anyone's mentioned it yet, but I think it's important to note that the Quran is also the source of several truly horrible, real world laws and serves as the foundational document of more than a couple of theocratic islamo-fascist states. If I were to take a page from the preacher's book, it would be for reasons of POLITICAL expression and dissent. In fact, there's a very strong argument that the POLITICAL right to protest islamic law is the single most pressing right - at least for women, non-muslims and islamic reformers - that currently exists on the face of the planet.

That would actually be a great tv show. "Are you a moderate muslim?" bring out a bunch of muslims who say they are moderate then start doing stuff to see how long they will stay moderate or how long they will start foaming at the mouth. You could do stuff like, show women driving, playing music, show men without beards, have cartoons about Islam, dump a koran in the toilet, or even just make the gesture that you are going to and see if he snaps. It will be a laugh riot.

34“Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. ...And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. 37“For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.” 38They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”

The context was constitutional rights, not delusional rights concocted by leftists.

How else would you characterize the Warren court's decision in O'Brien that burning a draft card on the steps of a federal courthouse was "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment? Would the Framers have recognized burning documents as speech?

Most people in most of the world don't believe in free speech. Even in this country only a few liberals or conservatives do. Libertarians, thank god, almost always support free speech, but there are so few of them.

All total, I suspect less than 25% of all Americans support free speech, otherwise we wouldn't have so many laws banning hate speech, racist speech, or "speech crimes" against a religion, cult, creed, ethnicity, gender or otherwise "disadvantaged" group.